Opinion
Civil Case No. 05-40267.
August 23, 2006
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is Petitioner's "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus," filed August 25, 2005. Also before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Honorable Paul J. Komives, United States Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge's forty-two page report and recommendation recommends that this Court dismiss Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Magistrate Judge served the report and recommendation on all parties on July 7, 2006 and notified the parties that any objections must be filed within ten days of service. No party has filed objections to the report and recommendation.
The Court's standard of review for a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation depends upon whether a party files objections. If a party does not object to the report and recommendation, the Court does not need to conduct a review by any standard. See Lardie v. Birkett, 221 F. Supp. 2d 806, 807 (E.D. Mich. 2002) (Gadola, J.). As the Supreme Court observed, "[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings. " Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Since neither party has filed objections to the report and recommendation, the Court need not conduct a review.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the report and recommendation [docket entry 21] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [docket entry 1] is DENIED.